HydroHub™ compared with H2i Technology.

Checkable, factual points only.

What each of us publishes about the hardware.

H2i Technology's own public materials describe the product as an “ultra-high-tech ‘black box’” containing “proprietary software to manage the injection of hydrogen into a diesel engine”. At the time of review those materials do not publish the underlying electrolysis technology, the components, the consumables or how the system is built.

For our part, the technology page states the cell type (PEM, solid polymer membrane), the fact that no potassium hydroxide or other electrolyte is added, and a specification sheet per SKU with gas output, current draw, supply voltage and dimensions. Both approaches are legitimate commercial choices. We publish ours; the contrast is the point, and we will leave the conclusion to you.

One further transparency point is visible on their own site, not in the product specification. H2i Technology's homepage and footer invite visitors to “Invest Now” and to “sign up to receive exclusive investment opportunities” on the same pages that promote their hydrogen system. Their May 2024 press release is headlined around “securing first revenues” and “converting field test agreements into sales contracts”. That is a legitimate communications choice, but it is investor-facing framing rather than product-purchase framing. We note it only because it sits alongside the product marketing on the same public site: this company sells and ships priced hardware today; H2i Technology's own published materials present their product alongside an active investment invitation.

Questions.

How does HydroHub compare with H2i Technology?

Both are Australian suppliers of on-board hydrogen systems aimed at diesel engines, and both target a similar customer: stationary generators, mining, construction and agriculture. The differences that a buyer can actually check are transparency differences rather than exotic technical ones. We publish the cell technology, the consumable, the per-model gas output and current draw, a fixed price in two currencies and a direct checkout. At the time of this review H2i Technology published a system-level description without clearly identifying the cell type or components, published no pricing, and offered a register-interest form rather than a purchase path.

They claim about 11% fuel reduction. Is that credible?

An 11% figure sits inside the range the peer-reviewed experimental literature actually supports for hydrogen enrichment under load, so it is not an implausible number in the way that 30–50% claims are. What matters is the substantiation behind it rather than the size of it. At the time of review the testing supporting their figures was described as having been carried out by a master mechanic rather than an accredited testing laboratory, and the assumptions behind the per-unit annual savings and CO₂ figures were not published. Ask for the raw test method, the engine, the duty cycle and who conducted it — of them and of us.

Why don't you publish your own savings percentage if theirs is within range?

Because under the Australian Consumer Law a performance claim must be substantiated at the time it is made, and we cannot substantiate a single number that would hold across engines, load factors, fuel quality and driver behaviour. We publish the mechanism, the peer-reviewed range, attributed single-instance field data with its measurement method, and a calculator that runs on the operator's own inputs within conservative bands. Read our evidence review for the full position.

Is a competitor's lack of published pricing a real problem?

It is a real difference, and whether it is a problem depends on how you buy. Quote-gated sales are normal in industrial equipment and can suit a complex, engineered install. But if you are evaluating a retrofit on commercial grounds, an unpublished price means you cannot calculate a payback period without entering a sales process, and you cannot benchmark two suppliers against each other on cost. We publish fixed delivered prices for exactly that reason.

Is this comparison fair to H2i Technology?

It is drawn solely from their publicly published material at the time of review and is limited to factual, checkable points. Their claims are labelled as their claims throughout, not restated as fact. We hold no access to their internal test data, they are a legitimately funded and active Australian business, and public material changes — check their current site before deciding. If anything here is out of date or misstated, tell us and we will correct it.

Where might H2i Technology be the better fit?

If you are based in Victoria and want a supplier close at hand, if you prefer a managed, consultative sales and deployment process over buying hardware directly, or if you want a supplier whose commercial model is built around large single-site generator installations with an engineered scope of works, that is a reasonable preference. We sell hardware with published specifications and a published price; that suits some buyers and not others.